Military Review

Dear War Scrap: American Savings

In the United States, work is under way to prepare for the withdrawal of troops from the territory of Afghanistan, which is slowly but surely turning into a large dump of technological scrap metal. The Pentagon is engaged in the destruction of cutting-edge military equipment and military equipment, although the Afghan conflict has already cost the US $ more than 630 billion dollars to US taxpayers, and the post-military spending is estimated at more than 1 trillion. dollars (providing veterans). And they don’t talk about human casualties, the American contingent in Afghanistan lost more than 2200 people killed and more than 18 thousands of people injured.
Despite such tangible spending, the US is going to destroy at least 20% of its military equipment, which is currently in Afghanistan and which they do not want to take out of the country after the withdrawal of their troops from there in 2014. To date, the US Army has already released more than 77 thousand tons of various military vehicles and equipment for scrap. Among the disassembled military equipment are special armored cars with additional protection against improvised landmines and land mines.
Officials of the American army say that they are ready to get rid of the equipment in which they no longer feel the need, or the transportation of which back to the US will be very expensive. So, in particular, thousands of combat vehicles with mine and ambush protection, which were specifically designed to protect the crew from bombings on the roads, should go for scrap metal to 2. Currently, the American contingent is armed with about 11 thousands of such vehicles. In any case, the Afghan scrap metal reception centers are already very heavily loaded with work, dismantling expensive American military equipment for scrap.
Dear War Scrap: American Savings

When asked why the US military does not want to leave all this wealth to their Afghan counterparts, the US authorities are responding rather evasively. One of these reasons is that they have already installed lighter vehicles to the Afghan army, which are supposedly much better suited for Afghan roads. Anyway, by the end of 2014 of the year (when the American troops leave Afghanistan), the US military is going to destroy military equipment and equipment in Afghanistan worth about $ 7 billion. At the same time, the Obama administration is trying to find a political solution to the issue of the Taliban movement, which is still active in Afghanistan, despite the military campaign that has been going on since 2001.
The well-known American newspaper The Washington Post has already called the decision of the American military "unprecedented": instead of transferring the equipment and equipment to the Afghan army, which is supposed to support the world in the region after the departure of American soldiers or sell it to other states, the US simply turns equipment and equipment in scrap metal. And this is at a time when the country is experiencing the consequences of a fairly strong budget sequestration. Against this background, the inadmissible luxury in the form of the destruction of 7 billion dollars looks rather strange.
77 thousand tons, as many, according to journalists, equipment and military equipment have already been destroyed by the US military as part of the preparations for the withdrawal of their military contingent from the territory of Afghanistan. In the United States, they decided not to return part of the military equipment and not to hand it over to seemingly their official allies — the new Afghan army, the training of which the Americans have been doing all these years.

According to the American authorities, it is expensive to return equipment and equipment back to the US, but it’s impossible to give the Afghan army, with no other options left. It turns out the paradox cost 7 billion. Dollars - that is how much is already destroyed military equipment. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of units of various military equipment, including almost 2000 MRAP combat vehicles, equipped with mine and ambush defense. The cost of each such vehicle is approximately 1 million. This technique would certainly be useful to the new Afghan army, but the United States made it clear that the transfer of military equipment is impossible. First, various legal obstacles prevent this. And secondly, the command of the American army does not believe that Afghans are able to cope with this military equipment and keep it fully operational.
However, experts do not believe these explanations, seeing signs of corruption here and warning about possible negative consequences. The situation was commented on by Michael Schenk, who is the director of international politics for FCNL. According to the expert, such disposal is terrible, first of all, for the ecology of the country where it occurs, while for manufacturers weapons it's profitable. Since they will be provided with new orders in the future. At the same time, for ordinary American taxpayers - this is a solid loss, 7 billion dollars have already been destroyed, they just disappeared in Afghanistan. In this case, no one gets the benefit - neither the Americans nor the Afghans. In fact, the money is simply thrown to the wind; in addition, the country receives political damage. According to Schenk, the United States shows the entire Afghan people that they do not trust them and refuse to transfer equipment.
The US military says it is much easier to destroy military equipment and equipment than to return it all to the US or to other military bases and repair it after the Afghan campaign. There were allegedly not willing to purchase the equipment at a discount, but at the same time with self-delivery. It turns out too expensive. But for scrap buyers, as it turned out, there were no special problems. Many human rights activists in the United States at the same time believe that in this case it was not without a lobby on the part of gunsmiths who are simply interested in new orders.

Anti-war activist David Swanson says that the US military budget is growing, despite the general sequestration of the budget: “Pay attention while the military is engaged in the destruction of military equipment for 7 billion dollars, Congress is considering the allocation of 80 billion dollars for future military operations . The Pentagon’s budget, which was approved by Congress, has generally grown compared with 2012, despite the budget sequestration and the decrease in social spending on health, food and other vital domestic programs of the country. ”
Remarkable is the fact that after the end of the military campaign in Iraq, the American army did not destroy machinery and equipment, and without special problems sent it to neighboring Kuwait, back to America or transferred to the current Iraqi authorities. Then there was simply no talk about the high cost of transporting equipment home or mistrust to local power structures.
According to information available in the media, at present, about 66 thousands of US Army soldiers, who constitute the main force of the NATO contingent in this country, are serving in the territory of the Republic of Afghanistan. Officially, already after 2014, the countries of the NATO bloc will not conduct any military operations in Afghanistan. According to the plan that was developed at the Pentagon, there will be about 3-9 thousands of US military in Afghanistan after this date, who will play the role of military specialists.
Information sources:
-http: //
-http: //
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. TRex
    TRex 25 June 2013 07: 31
    The United States is so uncertain about the future of democracy, which it "sowed" in Afghanistan (today there are reports of an attack on the presidential palace in Kabul) that it chops the ropes and dumps home ... They leave us the problem of Afghan drug trafficking. I think there is only one plus in this - they will not leave their equipment to the Mujahideen, otherwise they will blow Karzai's head off in six months, or maybe it will last a year or two.
    Russia needs to prepare to strengthen borders in Asia ... But how? The allies there are dead, unreliable ... and strive to pull the blanket to their side.
    1. cartridge
      cartridge 25 June 2013 08: 46
      America cannot be understood in the mind, a common arshin cannot be measured!
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 25 June 2013 09: 35
        And they didn’t understand shit in the bushes, but now it’s clear that they are not able to bring out all the equipment because there is NO MONEY.
        1. igor67
          igor67 25 June 2013 19: 46
          This is a Soviet technology, it makes no sense to evacuate, economically, broken or obsolete equipment
        2. vikontas56
          vikontas56 25 June 2013 23: 05
          On the contrary, they got stuff there! Drug production in Afghanistan with amers increased forty times, so they don’t have a shortage of funds! Most likely, the equipment that is destroyed is so saturated with the drug that it was transported on it that it got to the States, traces of drugs can be detected and confirmed by what everyone already knows - the States are covering up drug production and drug trafficking and have a lot of it!
      2. igor67
        igor67 25 June 2013 19: 44
        Quote: cartridge
        America cannot be understood in the mind, a common arshin cannot be measured!

        And the Soviet troops did not leave the equipment in Afghanistan? Here is one of the burial grounds.
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 25 June 2013 10: 14
      And how is today's Afghanistan different from Afghanistan in 1999? The fact that the Americans call the Taliban really several tribes dividing Afghanistan into pieces, as it was then with Hekmatyar was cut with Dostum and Massoud, each was supported by certain tribes, all of them were engaged in the cultivation of opium poppy that flowed to Europe through Russia. The Taliban did the same ... The presence of the Americans in Afghanistan did not change anything at all, so they did not sow anything there ...
    3. Truth lover
      Truth lover 25 June 2013 12: 17
      What kind of border strengthening can we talk about when the whole system is mired in corruption ?! The border will be open for these mountain goats, hundreds of tons of drugs will flood into Russia and settle in the bodies of our people. What can oppose this to GDP? NOTHING!

      At one time, people told me that in the Far East, on the borders with China, our pilots at airports faced and are faced with the following problem: the person (pilot) seems to be honest, has no relation to any smuggling, but the brothers get in touch with him from China, representatives of local trade circles, so to speak, who tell this person everything about his family, where his wife works, where the children study and how much they return home ... And then this person is offered to take 10 tons of cargo on board norms, of course, without declaring it in any way. And a person takes it, because there is nowhere to go, because he is not protected by anyone.

      And the system of such smuggling has been working for decades and will work. It’s the same with drugs
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 25 June 2013 15: 15
        Truth lover
        And now the border is locked! Terrible American marines, in an embrace with an invincible Georgian battalion, are dying in packs in fierce battles, covering us from the drugs with their breasts! They go to drug dealers in the bayonet seven times a day, protecting the mountain trails from them until the last bullet! And lo, horror! our only shield is about to fall !! I’m going to wash the chair described with fear ...
        1. Mikhail3
          Mikhail3 25 June 2013 17: 03
          Yes, I completely forgot. particular horror pierces me to the news that terrifying drug dealers hired indescribable Mongol hackers. No one except these software monsters (having spent, of course, billions) is able to crank up the superoperation of viewing Vkotaktikov and the fiercely classified Odnoklassniki! In which mu ... valiant officers that is, they post all this secret information! Abundantly equipping them with pictures! And if that isn’t enough, the wives and children of these fucking ... successful pilots in terms of secrecy will generously add in their covers!
        2. Donvel
          Donvel 26 June 2013 00: 56
          In fact, the NATO contingent is a regular army, which at least keeps the drug dealer in check. And the Afghan army is unlikely to replace them. While the Americans are there, beyond our borders, more or less calm, no matter how much we would like to.
          1. Constantine
            Constantine 26 June 2013 02: 17
            Under the NATO army, drug production increased significantly. What bridle is it about?
      2. Mister X
        Mister X 25 June 2013 18: 11
        Quote: True Love
        What can oppose this to GDP? NOTHING!

        GDP does not suit him ...
        Was BNE better?
        I handed over all with giblets for a check.

    4. Dimy4
      Dimy4 25 June 2013 19: 01
      Or to pull off as fried smells.
  2. cobalt
    cobalt 25 June 2013 07: 54
    Apparently the Americans have found such a way out for the legal supply of "Syrian" Basmachi with weapons. Then they will everywhere say that they sold the scrap metal, and then unknown artisans patched it up and the militants entered Syria in brand-new MRAPAHs, and the Americans seem to have nothing to do with it.
    1. igor36
      igor36 25 June 2013 12: 00
      Is it by accident not from Afghanistan that the container ship broke in the Indian Ocean? 4500 containers is approximately 100 thousand tons. weapons and equipment for the Syrian bandits.
  3. Sashkessss
    Sashkessss 25 June 2013 08: 10
    What are we talking about, dear Cobalt? What is Syria - everything stops and collapses there, allies are already 180 degrees - and back down. They did not just "forget" the remaining specialists - they can calmly prepare the ground for a new Afgan. And the equipment will be assembled there, as you say. Hopefully the Russians will secure the best supply of weapons to Afghanistan to support Karzai. Otherwise ...
  4. Dima190579
    Dima190579 25 June 2013 08: 35
    On the Afghan border in Central Asia, today you can begin to build a large fence and dig a deep moat. You look and they will carry less drugs.
    1. fero
      fero 25 June 2013 09: 35
      A wall in the mountains? ... The price will be like the Great Chinese.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 25 June 2013 09: 38
        The price will be like the Great Chinese.

        So the Chinese will build, they have experience.
        1. fero
          fero 25 June 2013 11: 32
          Who will pay for this "engineering masterpiece"? lol The Chinese, of course, can build, but they won’t finance for sure ... they don’t do it anymore
    2. Truth lover
      Truth lover 25 June 2013 12: 19
      Will we embody the experience of Palestine? smile
    3. MG42
      MG42 25 June 2013 12: 49
      Quote: Dima190579
      On the Afghan border in Central Asia, today you can begin to build a large fence and dig a deep ditch

      The difficulty is = besides the mountainous terrain, the geography of the border with 3 countries at once, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Iran is not taken, because the drug goes through it ..
      1. not good
        not good 25 June 2013 21: 16
        After the construction of the Olympic facilities is completed, many workers will be freed, only promise money for the next megaproject and no difficulties will stop our officials. laughing
        1. The comment was deleted.
  5. engineer74
    engineer74 25 June 2013 08: 48
    If sclerosis does not change me, this year there was a Russian-Chinese meeting on the topic "Afghanistan after the Amers."
    So the hardworking Chinese will come there and utilize scrap metal, and the Taliban, and the Alkaida, and Karzai with NATO advisers ... smile
    1. StolzSS
      StolzSS 25 June 2013 09: 32
      I agree with you. Most likely it will turn out that way they will come and utilize everything there))) And they will become calmer and we will get a little easier)
    2. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 25 June 2013 09: 46
      And at the same time they will populate and begin to grow tomatoes.
    3. Nayhas
      Nayhas 25 June 2013 10: 16
      The Chinese are the only country capable of solving the Afghan problem. Mass terror + the settlement of Afghanistan by the Chinese in twenty years will put out the fire ...
      1. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 25 June 2013 17: 21
        Let's not forget that once Afghanistan almost extinguished China. Under the English leadership, it is true ... It was in Afghanistan that the British took those tons and tons of opium, which they stuffed their clippers, shamefully called by our literature teahouses. "Cutty Sark", yeah ... And the whole world, watching how millions of Chinese are aging to death, called these clippers opium. A pain in the ass like drug Afghanistan may seem too big to the Chinese in the end ...
  6. Forest
    Forest 25 June 2013 08: 52
    American taxpayers - ordinary workers, engineers, entrepreneurs - are also hostages of the "expensive" Pentagon, paying for its ever-growing appetites.
  7. vitas
    vitas 25 June 2013 08: 56
    Americans are so rich, that’s the only way that money is scattered. We arrived, fought, did not win, sawed equipment and dumped home. But how many warriors will return home, these crazy killers, who will have no one to kill, wang the United States big problems! am
  8. volkodav
    volkodav 25 June 2013 08: 57
    naive you guys smile For a long time now, the WTA of NATO has been carrying drugs across the border to our quick-eyed brothers, Uzbeks, Kyrgyz and Tajiks, carrying the border with Kazakhs to the castle and visa regime
  9. rkka
    rkka 25 June 2013 09: 00
    That drank American budget wassat Our olympiad here and there did not stand. . .
  10. pensioner
    pensioner 25 June 2013 09: 00
    When asked why the US military does not want to leave all this wealth to its Afghan counterparts, the US authorities respond rather evasively.

    "... and to the question" Won't you leave us some military equipment? "I answered evasively. - How ?.
    1. POBEDA
      POBEDA 23 July 2013 23: 54
      Firstly, it’s easy to arm the Afghans.
      Secondly, this technique is designed specifically for the colonial army.
      Thirdly, only 2000 MRAPs can be transported somewhere, or 2000 flights with C-130 Hercules or 400 flights with C-5 Galaxy. Calculate how much this transportation of the equipment used in battles and requiring repair will cost. According to some reports, the delivery of heavy MRAP from the USA to Afghanistan or vice versa costs $ 750000. The price of a new one, depending on the model, ranges from 600000 to 1 million.
      Fourth, Congress has approved $ 80 billion MRAP supply financing plan
  11. Sashkessss
    Sashkessss 25 June 2013 09: 07
    I quote the American second president John Adams to the third paragraph from the bottom
    If injustice and oppression comes to this country, it will come under the guise of a struggle for individual freedom.
    Moreover, the struggle is expressed in foreign policy, and not in domestic. And they allocate more money to it than to themselves. As a result, they will either self-destruct when the money runs out ... Or they will take over the world and we will be in the ass.
  12. fenix57
    fenix57 25 June 2013 09: 08
    "In any case, the Afghan scrap metal collection points are already very heavily loaded ..."-Chinese to invite and all things! There is a desire how much ... to work for the benefit of the Middle Kingdom. laughing
  13. Sashkessss
    Sashkessss 25 June 2013 09: 10
    Phoenix, I think they're all shouting "NOOOOOOOO!" on the picture. Or I'm wrong?
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 25 June 2013 13: 46
      Not. They answer Kaa that they hear well ... wassat
  14. sys-1985
    sys-1985 25 June 2013 10: 28
    Very little money to put under the press, however chic!
  15. misham
    misham 25 June 2013 10: 28
    These fellow babos know how to count. Apparently they fear that by transferring a bunch of machines, equipment and weapons to the Afghans (or "allies" from Central Asia) free of charge, they will have to maintain a new high-tech Afghan army with illiterate personnel. Expensive spare parts and repairs, expensive ammunition. This is definitely money down the drain. Therefore, arming the Afghan army and police is simpler.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 25 June 2013 10: 37
      You are right on the spot. In Afghanistan, there is simply no personnel who could service all this equipment, as there are not so many reserves of fuel and lubricants. The cost of maintaining the mountain of this equipment would become the main requirement of the Afghan leadership in the negotiations. It will be very expensive to withdraw so much equipment, it will be necessary to resolve the issue with many states that will try to profit from this to the maximum. In addition, let's not forget that Afghanistan is already in the real environment of China, which may simply not allow the withdrawal of equipment, and even leaving such wealth to the Chinese "comrades" is stupid ...
  16. Strashila
    Strashila 25 June 2013 11: 11
    "One of the reasons named is that they have already supplied the Afghan army with more light cars, which are supposedly much better suited for Afghan roads. "... an interesting interpretation, from it it follows that in fact 2000 cars, the cost of 1 lam of bakers simply do not meet the stated requirements ... so they quietly decided to dispose of them, and they will hide the real losses ... then it’s not good if the truth about super- the miracle of amerikoskom weapons will emerge ... who will then need it.
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 25 June 2013 14: 18
      Quote: Strashila
      an interesting interpretation, it follows from it that in fact 2000 cars cost per 1 lama of tankers simply do not meet the stated requirements ...

      It follows that the Americans were tormented by bad, unprepared and uncomfortable cars, and the Afghans were given light and classy ones. wink
  17. _KM_
    _KM_ 25 June 2013 11: 46
    Do not worry a scam for the disposal of military equipment and concealment of losses and theft! This is a real American scale!
  18. Constantine
    Constantine 25 June 2013 11: 51
    and post-war spending is estimated at more than $ 1 trillion. dollars (provision of veterans)

    Well, yes .. Well, yes))) For those who have not yet seen:

  19. yanus
    yanus 25 June 2013 13: 26
    Set off sawing the budget. Even in India they can’t be so brazen. )))
    1. Constantine
      Constantine 25 June 2013 13: 54
      Our embezzlers are just children)
  20. The comment was deleted.
  21. Mister X
    Mister X 25 June 2013 13: 53
    Remember the American Lend-Lease program for the supply of equipment to the USSR,
    food and raw materials.
    After the war in the USSR, the surviving equipment was restored, painted and returned,
    but at that time, the US economy was experiencing rapid economic growth and all the equipment was re-melted.

    Perhaps this time they are trying to stimulate their industry in this way.
    As far as I remember, after the war with Saddam there was no economic take-off of industry in the USA.
    A miracle may not pass this time.

    But the Yankees are well acquainted with the golden rule of trading: "Pulling is the best marketing."
  22. KG_patriot_last
    KG_patriot_last 25 June 2013 14: 54
    in order to stimulate their industry and gunsmiths, it would be possible to sell these weapons at a low price. because recycling is also worth the money ...
    they said about Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, they’ll say they’ll pass it on ... (when Uzbekistan left the CSTO). I do not believe that simply destruction is cheaper than selling as is ...

    I think here we are talking about the stupid flight of Americans ... well, or just about stupidity ...

    in any case, the CIS will benefit from this, there will be no American armored personnel carriers with tadibs on board near our players ...
    1. Mister X
      Mister X 25 June 2013 17: 46
      Quote: KG_patriot_last
      The CIS will only benefit from this, there will be no American armored personnel carriers with tadibs on board near our gamers ..

      Very true noticed.
      As they say, "glory to Allah" wink
  23. PValery53
    PValery53 25 June 2013 15: 56
    Why did you delete my comment?
  24. Son
    Son 25 June 2013 18: 34
    I expose to publicity, economic benefits for the purpose of the action described in the article:
    1. All - write off.
    2. Order a new one, at the expense of the budget ("otkaktiki", "sawing").
    3. To give an opportunity to earn money for their bourgeois on orders.
    4. For "spirits", order other equipment for your bourgeoisie (see p. 2,3).
    5. For the "spirits", at the expense of the budget, purchase equipment (for example, Mi-17 helicopters), let everyone earn money ... In different proportions ...
    6. In fulfillment of clause 4,5 - resell everything to the "spirits" (see clause 2).
  25. shamil
    shamil 25 June 2013 21: 02
    poppy fields what to cultivate? -Hamera!
  26. rogiram
    rogiram 25 June 2013 23: 54
    currently, about 66 thousand soldiers of the American army are serving in the territory of the republic of Afghanistan

    Why not save them for scrap for reasons of economy?
  27. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 26 June 2013 00: 21
    American practicality, if you count depreciation and logistics, it is easier for them to create "new scrap" yes
  28. I think so
    I think so 26 June 2013 01: 39
    Here it is - the FACE of defeat in the war ...
    Ten years of war and the result - we roll back, throwing equipment and weapons on the battlefield, barely having time to put them out of action ...
    There are no allies left in the region - only enemies ... The one whom they themselves have chosen (Karzai) does not want and cannot ... Those who have been bombing all this time will soon crash ...
    The results of the war among the are MUCH worse than the result of the war in the same USSR.

    Well, this once again emphasizes important axioms:
    1. The hired army is incapable of winning wars.
  29. strange and pretty meaningless
    strange and pretty meaningless 26 June 2013 09: 11
    Quote: I think so
    The results of the war among the are MUCH worse than the result of the war in the same USSR.

    It depends on what is considered the aim of the war. If the task is to wreak havoc in the center of Eurasia, then, by and large, the result is obvious. If the goals were to secure a long-term fortified bridgehead, then yes, the result is not so hot.
    Quote: I think so
    1. The hired army is incapable of winning wars.

    And what can be won in such a war? The USSR in the Afghan war strengthened its southern underbelly, while making considerable investments not only in the war itself, but also in the politics and economy of Afghanistan. Zapadensky wars are essentially predatory. And what about the impoverished Afghanistan to take the fattening America? Zero resources, the population is warlike. The conclusion is only to spoil Russia and China. Here they really worked - they tried.
  30. Volodya Sibiryak
    Volodya Sibiryak 21 July 2013 06: 03
    .. I’m not going to give it to anyone else ..